duration question

[taurushead]

im assuming this has been covered but i can't find it anywhere.

is it more beneficial to work out for longer, less hard?? i seem to find some kind of a horrible blood sugar drop if i do a higher intensity for less time. so does it matter if i just walk instead of jog , or something, for longer? heart wise?? i know its not quite as good...but is there that much of a diff??

[WonderRandy]

longer is better than harder (no dirty jokes please :lol: ) Once you reach your goal heart rate for aerobics, more intensity does little good, and can even be counterproductive (strain on heart, fatigue, etc). Walking is great.

[taurushead]

really?! oh wow. i had no idea!! thank you for the useful info Randy!:)

[leminchyl]

i agree. i like to run for a long time at a slow speed... but if i'm geeked up on no explode then i go faster for a shorter time. no explode is energy stuff- i dont drink anything with caffeine, so it affects me more than most.

[choc_puddin]

hard exercise is good for the 'ole heart (to a certain degree as WonderRandy mentioned)
But if you can sustain a decent heart rate at a slower pace- like brisk walking- then this will have the same benefits as an intense sprinting session.
I think its up to personal goals/tastes.
I like to do a mixture- hard exercise for when I'm feeling energetic- usually most days, but when I feel like I've been over training I step it down to an easy jog for longer.
Personally, any exercise is good exercise. So just do what you feel like at the time :hamster:

[karenlovessnow]

What about the interval stuff I've been reading a lot about lately...like walking for five-ten minutes then speeding it up for a minute or two, dropping back down to a bit slower...etc., etc....?